PETTY SESSIONS.—Tuesday.

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 379, 28 March 1871, Page 2

PETTY SESSIONS.— Tuesday.

[Before James O'Neill, Esq.,', L. D. Nathan,

Esq., and H. D. Morpeth, Esq., J.P.'s]

Drunkenness.— William Campbell was fined 20s. and costs for being drunk.

Larceny.—John L. Carter was charged by D. Good with stealing from his premises one coat, value 3<)s.—Complainant stated that he left his house at two o'clock on the 22nd inst. ; left the doors closed, but not locked. On his return missed a coat (produced), value 30s.— D. Marks, panwbrokei', deposed that on the same day, between three and five o'clock, prisoner pledged the coat produced for four shillings.—Detective Ternahan deposed that he arrested the prisoner, and found the pledge ticket for the coat in his hand.—The same prisoner was charged by P. L. Bennett, with stealingfromhisshop,on March 14 two Crimean shirts, valued at fifteen shillings.—Complainant gave evidence that on the 14th, between G and 7 p.m., he missed two Crimean shirts from his shop. lie could identify the shirt produced as being his property. —Morris Marks deposed that on the 15th instant he bought a shirt from a person resembling the prisoner for three shillings. He could not identify the prisoner as the one who sold the shirt.—Prisoner called Richard McKay, who gave no evidence of importance. —For the first offence, the Bench sentenced the prisoner to two months' imprisonment with hard labour. The second offence the Bench considered was not proved.—A. Nicholson and S. Levy were again brought up on a charge of faking away palings from the garden of Mr. F. D. Fenton. The parents of the children were present, and on promising to look after them, the Bench ordered them to be discharged, as they had now been in custody some thirty hour 3.

Breach of Destitute Pehsoxs Relief Ordinance. —John Crouin was charged by his wife, Annie Croniu, with neglecting topayasuin of 103. a-week for the support of his wife and children.—Mr. J. 13. Russell appeared on behalf of the plaintiff; Mr. Wynn on behalf of the defendant.—Mr. Russell stated that the Court made an order some months ago lor the payment of 10s. a-week, but through some mistake the order was never issued to the defendant. The Bench was of opinion that a fresh summons was necessary to be issued, without costs. —Mr. Russell said that the man had asked his wife to return to his home. He had no home, so that if a fresh summons were issued they had no grounds to go upon, as tho man had taken away and grounds for saying he would not support the complainant. It was a very hard case, and a manifest failure of justice. The woman had received no support from her husband for months, and now she could get no redress, and ail in consequence of the neglect of the justices themselves. —Dismissed with costs.

Breach of Municipal- Police Act. —T. W. Marsh pleaded guilty to keeping a dog, which flew at a man, and put him in fear. Fined 2s. 6d. and costs. —H. Fendelow did not appear to answer a charge of allowing his chimney to take fire. Fined 10s. and costs. — Edward Walker pleaded guilty to allowing two cows to stray about the public streets. Fined ss. and costs. —Mary Ann Egerton was charged with using obscene language in the streets. She pleaded guilty. W. Young, Inspector of Nuisances, gave evidence as "to the character of the language used. Fined 40s. and costs, or fourteen days' imprisonment.

A Paltry Case. —John Fisher did not appear to answer a charge of leaving his truck in Durham-street. Fined 10s. and costs.

Bkkaciies ov the Impounding Act. —A Seufert was charged with keeping a goat tethered in a public place, lo wit, Elliott-streot. The defendant said he had previously been lined for having his goat loose, and now he was to be fined for keeping it tied up. He conld not understand it. lined Is and costs. —Mr. O'Connor pleaded guilty to a similar olFence. Dismissed with a caution. —Thomas McLeary pleaded guilty to allowing a horse to stray in Syruonds-street. Fined 2s. 6d. and costs.

Dog Nuisance Act. —Cecelia Walker pleaded guilty to having a dog without a ticket on for tho present year, but stated that she was not aware that the time was come for to take out fresh collars. Fined Is aud costs. —Mary A. Ford was found guilty of a similar offence. Fined Is and costs. —It. H. Bartlett and Murdoch McLeod, for similar offences, were also fined Is and costs.

Pboyoking Language.—Thomas Macready was charged by G-. Staiues with having, on tho 26th inst., used towards him insulting and provoking language.—Mr. Joy appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Wynu for the defence. Mr. Joy opened tho case.—U-eorgo Staines deposed :lam a broker in this city. On tho the KOlh inst. I met Mr. Macready in Canada Buildings at a meeting of the City Board. On that occasion defendant called me a "low, dirty, mean scoundrel," and a " low, dirty, mean hound." I had used no provokiug language towards him. He has habitually used insulting longuage towards me ever since I had a seat at the Board. I ask the Bench that he may give security to keep the peace, such language is calculated to make mo commit

a breach of the peace, which I should be very sorry to do. —Cross-examined by Mr. Wynn as to his demeanour previously in the Board, never called Mr. Macready a "pig," E°r a " big elephant," and he always behaved himself in ibe Boardroom with propriety and sobriety. On one occasion, when Mr. Macready was eating biscuits in the Boardroom, I said " pigs eat anywhere." I did not mean that the honorable member was a pig. Eeexamined by Mr. Joy.—Henry Chapman, deposed : I was present on the occasion referred to, reporting for the Herald. Corroborated the previous evidence as to the words used. The Board shortly after dissolved. Mr. Staines had used no provoking language to Mr. Macready on the occasion.—William Will, deposed : I was present on the occasion reporting for the Daily Southern Cross. (Notes produced and read, corroborating the previous evidence as to the words used.) —P. A. Philips deposed: I was presiding as Chairman on the occasion referred to. I ruled that Mr. Staines was in order on the occasion.—Cross-examined by Mr. Wynn : I have been Chairman about twelve months. Mr. Staines had decidedly used no provoking language before Mr. Macready used the language complained. Mr. Staines' conduct at the Board on previous occasions has been decidedly of an irritating nature ; he has come to the Board not sober. He has been re • moved from the Boardroom forcibly by the police for misconduct. —To Mr. Joy : On the occasion of his expulsion, he was having a free fight all round. It was not Mr. Macready personally he was insulting. On the occasion now in question Mr. Staines had turned round to Mr. Ma.'ready and said, "lam too old a soldier to be put down by the likes of you, Mac." This was not reported.—Mr. Wynn addressed the Bench in iavour of a dismissal, but the Bench desired to hear the evidence of the other side.—R. Hampton deposed : I was a member of the City Board, but have resigned. T was a member for two years. I was present when this fracas occurred. Mr. Staines* conduct had been very irritating on the occasion. His demeanour has ordinarily been of a very disorderly and irritating character. He has not" always come to the Board sober. —To Mr. Joy :He was not the only one on all occasions acting disorderly. On the occasion in question Mr. Staines' language was insulting to the Board. I remember Mr. Staiues calling Mr. Macready a " pig," and an " elephant." This was two or three months since.—The Bench retired for about ten minutes, and on retiring expressed regret that the case had been brought before the Bench, and that there was not sufiicieut power invested in the Board to repress these irregularities. But seeing that it had come before the Court, for the sake of the members, and for the protection of the Board, the Bench had unanimously resolved to bind over both parties, in their own recognisances, in 250, to keep the peace for three months. Assault. —John Sceats was charged with having assaulted George Staines, by striking him with his onen hand in the face. —Mr. Joy for the prosecution ; Mr. Beveridge for the defence. —The complainant swore that Sceats struck him in the face with the open hand. Never gave any cause for defendant to have treated him so. -John Jugger called by Mr. Joy, before being sworn wished to know who would p^y his expenses. After a lengthened argument by each of the professional gentlemen, the Bench decided that the fact of witness having been subpoenaed, he was bound ' to give evidence —on being sworn, deposed that he was engaged as assistant clerk to the City Board. Kemembered the 22nd instant. Heard defendant say he should like to give prosecutor a good thrashing, but believed the whole thing a joke. Scoats was near enough to have struck him. Did not hear Seeals say he would punch >tames' head. — Cross-examined by Mr. Beveridgo : Stuines was not sober at the time.—.l W. Harrop, sworn, deposed : I am secretary to the City Board. Was present in the room at the time of the altercation between the parties ; but did not see a blow struck by Sceats. Treated the wholo thing as a lark.— Crossexamined by Mr. Beveridge: Saw Sceats merely strike one hand on the palm of tho other only.—Thomas Young, sworn, deposed : Am Inspector of Nuisances. Saw the parties at the Board-room. Heard Sceats say he would like to give Staines a thrashing. Did not see Sceats strike the complainant—merely challenged to fight Staines. —Cross-examined : Could nof- say Staines was intoxicated. —For the defence, Mr. Beveridge called Thomas Macready, who stated ho was present at the City Board on the day in question, for the purpose of meeting a committee. Staines came into the room, but was not sober. Staines was requested to leave the room, as he was not a member of the committee. Sceats did not strike a blow. If he had done so I must have seen him. —K. Hampton, late a member of the City Board, sworn, deposed to being present at the meeting on i.ho 22ud of March. Saw Staines enter the Board-room, who was not sober. There was no blow struck by Mr. Sceats. —P. A. Philips, Chairman of the City Board, deposed he was present at the meeting. Saw Staines enter the Board-room. Did not consider Staines was sober. It was a meeting of committee. Staines was not a member of the committee. [The witness generally corroborated the previous evidence.] — The Bench, in giving its decision, said the present case could be very well disposed of by fining defendant one shilling, and finding his own sureties in £50 to keep the peace for three months, and each of us express a hope that the City Board may conduct its business in future ■without the intervention of this i Court.